-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.1k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Ensure that stack layers above transport manager never get chained packet buffers. #9599
Merged
woody-apple
merged 1 commit into
project-chip:master
from
bzbarsky-apple:ensure-no-chained-buffers
Sep 13, 2021
Merged
Ensure that stack layers above transport manager never get chained packet buffers. #9599
woody-apple
merged 1 commit into
project-chip:master
from
bzbarsky-apple:ensure-no-chained-buffers
Sep 13, 2021
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
add support for BtpEngine messages longer than 1 pbufconnectedhomeip/src/ble/BtpEngine.cpp Lines 326 to 330 in 100b18c
This comment was generated by todo based on a
|
pullapprove
bot
requested review from
andy31415,
chrisdecenzo,
Damian-Nordic,
hawk248,
jepenven-silabs,
msandstedt and
woody-apple
September 10, 2021 18:30
tcarmelveilleux
approved these changes
Sep 10, 2021
msandstedt
approved these changes
Sep 10, 2021
andy31415
reviewed
Sep 10, 2021
…cket buffers. None of our upper-layer core really deals with chained packet buffers, starting with the way we do in-place decryption that assumes that we have a contiguous buffer. The changes here: 1) Flatten out possibly-chained buffers in the LwIP case in the UDP endpoint. 2) Ensure that we don't have a chained buffer in BTP. There was already a check for this in the "in progress" case; this change just adds the same check in the "idle" case.
bzbarsky-apple
force-pushed
the
ensure-no-chained-buffers
branch
from
September 10, 2021 21:01
100b18c
to
b8423e2
Compare
Size increase report for "gn_qpg-example-build" from eda07d5
Full report output
|
Size increase report for "nrfconnect-example-build" from eda07d5
Full report output
|
Size increase report for "esp32-example-build" from eda07d5
Full report output
|
andy31415
approved these changes
Sep 13, 2021
@LuDuda @jepenven-silabs @jmartinez-silabs @Damian-Nordic Please take a look? |
woody-apple
approved these changes
Sep 13, 2021
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
None of our upper-layer core really deals with chained packet buffers, starting with the way we do in-place decryption that assumes that we have a contiguous buffer.
The changes here:
and raw endpoints.
already a check for this in the "in progress" case; this change just
adds the same check in the "idle" case.
Problem
Want to ensure that upper layers never have to deal with chained buffers.
Change overview
See above.
Testing
Not sure how to test LwIP, unfortunately, especially how to inject chained buffers into the receive path there.